The Army and Marine Corps constitute the nation's land forces. Deployed on the ground and at sea, these forces provide unique and complementary capabilities for carrying out defense missions. The Army maintains forces for power projection, forcible entry, and sustained combat operations on land. The Marine Corps, as part of the nation's maritime forces, provides expeditionary forces to project combat power ashore in support of naval campaigns or in advance of Army and Air Force units. These diverse capabilities give military commanders a range of options for conducting ground operations.
The Army maintains heavy and light forces, as well as special operations forces, based in the United States, Korea, and Europe. Heavy forces -- armored and mechanized units -- are trained and equipped for mobile warfare and for operations against armies employing modern tanks and armored fighting vehicles. Light forces -- airborne, air assault, and light infantry units -- are tailored for forcible-entry operations and for operations on restricted terrain, such as mountains, jungles, and urban areas. Light and heavy forces can be employed independent of one another, or they can operate in tandem as part of a joint force, as was done during the Persian Gulf War. For major deployments, the Army can dispatch a U.S.-based contingency force of up to five divisions plus support elements anywhere in the world. Army forces stationed overseas provide an additional source of combat power for regional deployments. The capabilities of Army special operations forces are discussed in a separate chapter of this report.
The Marine Corps maintains forces designed for sea-based, self-sustained power projection and forcible entry ashore. Marine units are employed as part of Marine Air-Ground Task Forces (MAGTFs) consisting of ground and air combat, command, and support elements. Marine Expeditionary Units (MEUs) are forward deployed continuously in or near regions of vital U.S. interest. Embarked on amphibious ships patrolling outside the range of shore-based weapons, these forces provide a swift and effective means of responding to fast-breaking crises.
Operationally, land forces are assigned to a joint force commander, who employs them in close coordination with aviation and support forces. Land forces also can operate in conjunction with naval forces, as was the case in last year's Haitian deployment, when aircraft carriers sailed for Haiti with U.S.-based Army forces aboard. The uncertain demands of the post-Cold War world make this kind of flexibility key to the effective and efficient use of land forces.
MISSIONS
Land forces play a central role in the full range of military operations, from crisis response and limited interventions to armed combat. Through overseas presence and power projection, these forces help deter aggression and enhance regional stability. Should trouble strike, they are trained and equipped to seize and hold territory, against heavy opposition if necessary, and to sustain combat operations for as long as circumstances require.
Although U.S. land forces are necessarily structured and equipped for full-scale combat operations, they are also prepared to conduct a range of operations short of war. Such missions, which are becoming more prevalent in the post-Cold War era, include peace enforcement and peacekeeping, humanitarian assistance and disaster relief, evacuation of U.S. citizens from crisis regions, counterdrug operations, and assistance to law enforcement agencies during civil disturbances. For example, U.S. land forces are today playing a key role in ensuring that democracy will be restored to Haiti.
THREAT
Threats can be characterized in terms of forces and weapon systems.
Forces
U.S. forces could confront adversaries of vastly differing strengths and capabilities, depending on the location and nature of an operation.
Weapon Systems
In general, threats encountered in MRCs would be standing armies of foreign powers, armed with mixes of old and modern weapon systems. Adversaries in smaller-scale operations would tend to employ older weapon systems. Many nations, including members of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and the former Warsaw Pact alliance, are selling weapons on the international market. Thus, U.S. forces must be prepared to face a wide variety of systems, including some previously produced in the United States.
As illustrations, older tank systems that U.S. land forces might face include Soviet T-55s and T-62s, as well as early-generation T-72s; newer systems include later-generation Soviet T-72s with reactive armor and T-80(U)s with integral reactive armor. Older attack helicopters that potential adversaries might employ include Soviet MI-8/17 HIPs and German BO-105s; newer systems include Soviet MI-24/25 Hinds and upgraded French SA-342 Gazelles.
New weapon technologies will add more advanced capabilities to threat forces. Possible examples include tank upgrades (e.g., day and night optics, active defense systems that redirect or destroy incoming projectiles), advanced antitank guided missiles capable of top attacks against tank turrets, tactical ballistic missiles, and large-caliber, longer-range artillery.
Irregular forces will be unable to match the combat power of heavy U.S. weaponry. However, the proliferation of modern light arms, if combined with a fighting style unconstrained by laws or ethical codes, would pose significant challenges with which U.S. forces might have to deal.
Although potential adversaries are acquiring modern weapons, they are still vulnerable. U.S. dominance in command, control, communications, and intelligence technologies enables U.S. land forces to seize the initiative in battle. This advantage, coupled with the superior training and logistical support that U.S. land forces receive, gives them a capability unmatched by any potential opponent.
FORCE STRUCTURE AND CAPABILITIES
The structure of Army and Marine forces reflects the diverse operations they might be called upon to perform. Major regional conflicts pose the most significant potential demands, and thus drive force requirements. Land forces would be heavily involved in all phases of an MRC. The specific roles they could play are illustrated below:
These basic land force roles in major combat operations drive overall requirements for Army and Marine forces. Specific goals, derived in the Bottom-Up Review a year ago, call for the following forces to prosecute two nearly-simultaneous MRCs. Army combat forces would include 10 active component divisions, augmented by 15 enhanced-readiness Army National Guard (ARNG) combat brigades. The ARNG units will be maintained in a status that allows them to deploy within 90 days of mobilization. The Marine Corps would provide two to three Marine Expeditionary Forces (MEFs), augmented and reinforced by Marine Reserve forces.
The forces required for peace operations and smaller-scale operations normally are subsumed within those needed for MRCs. For example, the land force contingent for a substantial peace enforcement or intervention operation might include various combinations of the following: an Army airborne or air assault division, an Army light infantry division, an Army armored or mechanized infantry division, and a Marine Expeditionary Force (Forward).
Army Force Structure
The FY 1996 budget continues the Army's transition to the post-Cold War force structure mandated by the Bottom-Up Review. By the end of FY 1996, the Army will consist of four corps and 18 active and reserve component divisions, down from five corps and 28 divisions prior to the end of the Cold War. The active force will continue to be reduced, declining from 18 divisions and an end-strength of 732,000 in FY 1990 to 10 divisions and an end-strength of 495,000 in FY 1996.
Over the next two years, the Army will inactivate two army headquarters, called Continental U.S. Armies (CONUSAs), three combat brigades, and two divisional headquarters and their associated units. The remaining 10 active divisions will include one airborne, one air assault, two light infantry, and six heavy (armored and mechanized) divisions. All divisions will consist of three active component brigades. Some divisions will have one brigade stationed at a different location. The net result will be a reduction of approximately 10 percent relative to today's active force level of 540,000. The reductions and realignments will be accomplished as follows.
In FY 1995, the 194th Armored Brigade (Separate) at Fort Knox, Kentucky, and the 3rd Brigade of the 25th Infantry Division at Schofield Barracks, Hawaii, will be inactivated. The 1st Brigade, 7th Infantry Division (Light) at Fort Lewis, Washington, will be redesignated as the 3rd Brigade of the 25th Infantry Division. The 1st Brigade, 6th Infantry Division at Fort Richardson, Alaska, will be aligned with the 10th Mountain Division (Light Infantry), at Fort Drum, New York, serving as its third brigade.
Realignment of CONUSAs (the units that provide regional oversight for reserve training and mobilization) will also be completed in FY 1995. The 1st Army at Fort Meade, Maryland, and the 6th Army at The Presidio of San Francisco, California, will be inactivated. Oversight of reserve units will be consolidated under the two remaining CONUSA headquarters. The 2nd Army at Fort Gillem, Georgia, will control reserve units in an area extending from Minnesota to Louisiana and eastward. The 5th Army at Fort Sam Houston, Texas, will control reserve units in the western portion of the country.
In FY 1996, the headquarters and supporting units of the 1st Infantry Division (Mechanized) at Fort Riley, Kansas, and the 4th Infantry Division (Mechanized) at Fort Carson, Colorado, will be inactivated. One brigade at Fort Carson will also be inactivated. The brigade remaining at Fort Carson will fall under the command of the 2nd Armored Division at Fort Hood. The two brigades remaining at Fort Riley will serve as the third brigades of the two divisions stationed in Germany.
Adjustments in the Army reserve components -- the Army National Guard and the U.S. Army Reserve -- are being made consistent with the reduction in the active force structure. The National Guard has declined from 10 divisions in the early 1990s to eight divisions today; total end-strength in the Army reserve components will have declined from 736,000 in FY 1990 to 575,000 by FY 1998. Today, Army reserve component end-strength stands at 670,000.
The ARNG will continue to provide combat forces to augment the active force. In addition to the enhanced readiness brigades mentioned earlier, the ARNG will maintain strategic reserve combat forces consisting of eight divisions, two brigades, and one infantry scout group. These units will be maintained at readiness levels that allow them to mobilize in the event of an extended crisis or protracted operation. These forces also would provide an initial response in domestic emergencies. Like the enhanced readiness brigades, they could be activated and employed as a rotation force for peace operations.
ARNG and Army Reserve forces also will continue to perform combat support and combat service support functions that they have fulfilled so effectively and responsively in the past. More than 60 percent of the combat support and combat service support required by active Army forces will come from the reserve components. Reserve forces also will continue to play dominant roles in disaster relief operations in the United States.
Marine Corps Force Structure
The Marine Corps will maintain four divisions (three active and one reserve),
three active aircraft wings and one reserve wing, and associated active and
reserve combat support elements. The Marine Corps Reserve will continue to
provide forces to augment, reinforce, or reconstitute the active component of
the Marine Corps in time of war or national emergency. Active Marine Corps
end-strength has declined from 194,040 in FY?1991 to 174,000 today; Marine
Corps Reserve end-strength has dropped from 44,900 to 42,000 over the same
period. Table VI-1 summarizes the planned FY 1998 force structure for the
Army and Marine Corps.
Stationing
The following chart shows the location of major Army and Marine Corps units as of January 1995.
The peacetime presence of U.S. forces overseas demonstrates the nation's commitment to the security of friends and allies and enhances U.S. crisis-response capabilities.
EUROPE AND ATLANTIC REGION
The United States remains committed to fulfilling a significant role in the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. A corps headquarters plus substantial elements of two Army divisions, including support elements -- with a total troop strength of 65,000 -- will be retained in Europe. Brigade sets of Army equipment will remain prepositioned on the continent. This materiel will allow in-place divisions to grow to full strength and additional forces to be deployed to the theater in the event of a conflict. A Marine Expeditionary Unit will be routinely deployed in the Mediterranean Sea, and a set of equipment sufficient for a Marine Expeditionary Brigade will be maintained in Norway and on maritime prepositioning ships (MPS) in the Mediterranean Sea.
NORTHEAST ASIA AND PACIFIC REGION
The Army 2nd Infantry Division -- with two brigades plus other Eighth Army supporting elements and a total troop strength of nearly 26,000 -- will be maintained in South Korea to deter aggression from the north. The Army 25th Infantry Division (Light), stationed in Hawaii, and a brigade of the 10th Mountain Division, stationed in Alaska, are also oriented to the Pacific region. The 3rd Marine Division (one reinforced regiment of which is deployed in Hawaii) and an Army special forces battalion will be retained in Okinawa. Prepositioned equipment will be maintained ashore in the Pacific region for one Army brigade. Also, one set of equipment for a Marine Expeditionary Brigade will be maintained afloat on maritime prepositioning ships stationed in the vicinity of Guam.
SOUTHWEST ASIA
Two brigade sets of Army equipment will be stored ashore in the region. One of these sets will be maintained in Kuwait for use by U.S. forces who will deploy to the region on a rotational basis to train and exercise with Kuwaiti forces. One MPS squadron containing equipment for a Marine Expeditionary Brigade will be deployed in the region. In addition, one brigade set of Army equipment will be prepositioned afloat, for use in regional crisis-response operations.
READINESS AND SUSTAINABILITY
Maintaining ready, capable forces is the top priority of the defense program. The compensation and quality of life initiatives discussed in earlier sections of this report are key to attracting and retaining the high-quality personnel on which readiness depends. Training is another important contributor to readiness, and an area that will continue to receive close attention in the years ahead.
The Army and Marine Corps provide a wide range of training opportunities for their forces. These include joint and single-service programs in the United States and large multinational exercises conducted regularly abroad. The use of battle simulators at home bases and combat training centers (CTCs) allows Army and Marine forces to hone critical skills in advance of field exercises and operational deployments.
The National Training Center (NTC) at Fort Irwin, California, the Joint Readiness Training Center (JRTC) at Fort Polk, Louisiana, and the Combat Maneuver Training Center (CMTC) at Hohenfels, Germany, use instrumented field exercises to improve the readiness of battalion- and brigade-sized units. The Army's goal is to train 12 brigades at the NTC each year and 10 brigades at the JRTC, while providing annual training opportunities at the CMTC for all of its European-based infantry and armor battalions. The Battle Command Training Program (BCTP) gives division and corps headquarters staffs specialized training in wartime command functions. This program combines seminars and battle simulations at Fort Leavenworth with computer-assisted command post exercises at home stations. Plans call for all active component division and corps staffs to receive BCTP training once every two years; all ARNG division and brigade staffs will train once every three years.
Marine Corps units conduct large-scale, live-fire and maneuver field exercises at the Marine Corps Air-Ground Combat Center (MCAGCC) at 29 Palms, California. Eight active-duty and two reserve infantry battalions are trained each year in MAGTF-level exercises. The Mountain Warfare Training Center (MWTC) in Bridgeport, California, prepares Marine units for both mountain and cold-weather operations. Marine expeditionary units also receive extensive training before each deployment at MCAGCC, MWTC, and land force training centers, located at Camp Lejeune, North Carolina, and Camp Pendleton, California. Finally, under the MAGTF Staff Training Program, senior commanders and staffs receive specialized training for employing MEFs in joint operations.
Army and Marine forces also participate in joint and combined training exercises both in the United States and abroad. Major exercises in FY 1994 included Bright Star 94 in Egypt, Cobra Gold 94 in Thailand, Native Fury in Kuwait, Ulchi Focus Lens 94 in Korea, and Fuertes Caminos in South America.
Land forces have been employed in numerous crisis-response operations in recent years. These deployments, coupled with routine overseas presence missions, have placed strains on the operations and maintenance accounts, which also fund training and sustainment programs. The Department is acutely aware of this problem and is working with Congress to find a method of funding contingencies that does not harm readiness. In the meantime, some Army and Marine Corps commanders are abbreviating field exercises, operating fewer vehicles, and using simulators to achieve savings in operating and maintenance accounts, while maintaining at an acceptable level the quality of training provided to their forces.
MODERNIZATION
Modernization programs for the Army and Marine Corps will preserve the combat edge that U.S. land forces now possess, while laying the technological groundwork for longer-term enhancements.
Army
U.S. warfighting strategy calls for winning conflicts rapidly with minimum casualties by denying the opponent the ability to maintain a coherent operational plan or to respond decisively to changing battlefield conditions. This concept requires both superior weaponry and a superior ability to concentrate the efforts of intelligence, logistics, fire support, and maneuver forces at the decisive time and place. To this end, Army modernization programs emphasize five interrelated areas where U.S. forces must maintain a decisive edge: battlefield intelligence and communications; precision strikes; battlefield maneuver; force protection; and force projection and sustainment. To achieve these objectives in a fiscally constrained environment, the Army is integrating selected capabilities (e.g., night-vision devices, information digitization) into the force through system upgrades, while pursuing only those new programs of highest priority.
In some instances, modernization programs have been restructured or slowed to free resources for readiness and quality of life initiatives. One example is the Comanche (RAH-66) armed reconnaissance helicopter program, which has been restructured as a technology demonstration effort. Under the revised plan, two flyable prototypes of the Comanche will be produced. The Army will rely on the Apache Longbow helicopter for the armed reconnaissance function into the next century.
ABRAMS TANK UPGRADE
The M1A2 upgrade program will improve the lethality, mobility, and survivability of approximately 1,000 older Abrams M1 tanks. Enhancements include a 120mm gun, suspension improvements, a nuclear-biological-chemical (NBC) protection system, and improved armor. Battlefield performance will be enhanced through the addition of a commander's independent thermal viewer, an independent commander's weapon station, position navigation equipment, and a digital data bus and radio interface unit that permit the rapid transfer of data between the Abrams and other systems on the battlefield. The M1A2 upgrade program began in FY 1993. Since then, 234 tank upgrades have been funded; another 547 are programmed during FY 1996-2001. The remaining conversions will be accomplished with funds requested beyond FY 2001.
BRADLEY FIGHTING VEHICLE UPGRADE
The A3 upgrade to the Bradley fighting vehicle system will complement the capabilities provided by the M1A2. Approximately 1,600 existing Bradley A2s will be remanufactured into A3s. In addition to providing digital communications capability, the A3 upgrade improves the lethality and survivability of the Bradley by adding an improved fire control system and a commander's independent thermal viewer. When equipped with upgraded Bradleys, mechanized infantry units will be able to share battlefield data with M1A2-equipped armor units. Engineering and manufacturing development of the A2-A3 Bradley upgrade will continue through FY 1996. Low-rate initial production is scheduled for FY 1997.
APACHE LONGBOW AND LONGBOW HELLFIRE MISSILE
This modification to the Apache helicopter will provide ground commanders with a long-range aerial weapon system capable of delivering massed, rapid fire in day or night and in adverse weather. Longbow's digitized target acquisition system can automatically detect and classify targets. The target acquisition system uses a millimeter-wave radar to direct a fire-and-forget version of the Hellfire II missile. Initial operational tests and evaluation of the Longbow system will be conducted in January through March of 1995; a production decision is expected in October 1995.
BRILLIANT ANTI-ARMOR SUBMUNITION (BAT) AND SENSE AND DESTROY ARMOR (SADARM)
BAT and SADARM are fire-and-forget submunitions designed to destroy tanks and other armored targets. BAT submunitions will be carried deep into enemy territory by the Army Tactical Missile System (ATACMS). Once released, BAT will use infrared and acoustic sensors to autonomously locate and attack moving armored vehicles. BAT will begin contractor developmental testing in FY 1996 and start low-rate initial production in FY 1998. SADARM is delivered to its target by 155mm howitzers (two submunitions per projectile). It is designed to destroy lightly-armored vehicles, primarily self-propelled artillery. Once dispensed from its carrier, SADARM locates its target using dual-mode millimeter-wave and infrared sensors. SADARM began low-rate initial production in FY 1995 and is scheduled for initial operational testing and full-rate production in FY 1998.
JAVELIN
This new man-portable missile system will improve the antiarmor capability of dismounted Army and Marine forces. It will replace the Dragon antitank system in infantry, scout, and combat engineer units. The Javelin can destroy both conventional and reactive armor targets from frontal or top attack positions. The system will improve soldier protection in two ways. First, its fire-and-forget technology will allow gunners to launch their missiles and immediately take cover. Second, the Javelin can also be safely fired from enclosed positions. Javelin is currently in low-rate initial production; a decision on full-rate production will be made in 1997.
ADVANCED FIELD ARTILLERY SYSTEM (AFAS) AND FUTURE ARMORED RESUPPLY VEHICLE (FARV)
These new-generation indirect-fire cannon and artillery resupply systems will be used by heavy Army forces. They will provide a significant increase in accuracy, rate of fire, mobility, and survivability, restoring the Army's cannon artillery supremacy. Innovations incorporated in the systems include a liquid propellant cannon, automated ammunition handling, and advanced fire control capabilities. AFAS and FARV will be in research and development during the program years; procurement is scheduled to begin in FY 2005. The AFAS and FARV will replace, respectively, the M109A6 Paladin self-propelled howitzer and M992 field artillery ammunition supply vehicle in early-deploying divisions, freeing those systems for allocation to other artillery units.
ARMORED GUN SYSTEM (AGS)
This new lightly armored vehicle will provide early-entry forces with a rapidly deployable, direct-fire antiarmor capability. Designed for easy transport, the AGS can be driven on and off the cargo ramps of airlift aircraft and delivered directly to the battlefield via parachute sleds. The AGS will replace the aging M551A1 Sheridan armored gun system operated by light Army forces. A total of 216 of these vehicles are programmed for procurement during FY 1996-2001.
FAMILY OF MEDIUM TACTICAL VEHICLES (FMTV)
This new family of 2 1/2-ton and 5-ton trucks will be used by combat, combat support, and combat service support units to move troops, equipment, and supplies within operating theaters. The trucks will be produced in a variety of versions, all incorporating a common chassis. This will reduce production costs and save maintenance time and expenses. The current five-year procurement contract will end in FY 1996 after 7,319 trucks have been produced. A second five-year contract will be awarded in FY 1999.
Marine Corps
Marine Corps modernization requirements derive from the operational maneuver from the sea concept, which provides for assaults to be launched further offshore, with greater flexibility, speed, and combat power. Initiatives that emphasize amphibious and aerial assault capability; land, sea, and air mobility; mine countermeasures; and fire support capabilities are essential to this concept.
V-22
This new tilt-rotor aircraft is designed to replace the Marine Corps' aging fleet of CH-46 and CH-53D helicopters. The V-22's combination of range, speed, and payload will enable Marine units to move assault forces and supplies faster from ship to shore and within the area of operations. This improvement in mobility also enhances the survivability of supporting naval forces. Ships embarking these aircraft will be able to remain further offshore, thereby decreasing their vulnerability to shore-based missiles, underwater mines, and detection by ground surveillance systems. The V-22 program is currently in engineering and manufacturing development. Low-rate production is planned to begin in 1997.
ADVANCED AMPHIBIOUS ASSAULT VEHICLE (AAAV)
This new amphibious assault vehicle is designed to replace the Marine Corps' aging AAAV-7s, which are now more than 20 years old. The AAAV will allow Marine assault forces to deploy from amphibious ships located over the horizon, move rapidly to the beach, and continue the attack inland in a seamless operation. It will also provide armor-protected transport and direct fire support to Marine infantry forces ashore. Currently, two contractors are working to define AAAV concepts. The program plan anticipates a single competitively-awarded demonstration and validation contract in late 1995; low-rate production is anticipated to begin in 2005.
LIGHTWEIGHT 155MM HOWITZER
This program is a cooperative venture with the Army to replace the aging 155mm M198 howitzer with a lighter, more effective weapon. A lighter howitzer will make ship-to-shore delivery of artillery easier and increase the responsiveness of artillery units to ground operations. Initial research and development funds for the system are requested in the FY 1996 budget.
SHORT-RANGE ASSAULT WEAPON (SRAW)/PREDATOR
SRAW/Predator is a lightweight assault missile designed to defeat modern main battle tanks at short range. It improves gunner survivability through fire-and-forget technology and the ability to fire from enclosed spaces. This joint Army-Marine Corps program is currently in research and development.
Additional modernization programs for the Marine Corps are discussed in the Maritime Forces section of this report.
FY 1996 marks a year of continued change for the Army and Marine Corps. Both services will take additional steps to streamline and adapt their forces to post-Cold War requirements. While giving first priority to readiness, the FY 1996 budget and associated six-year program make the selective enhancements needed to keep Army and Marine equipment and munitions inventories capable and modern. The force structure and modernization initiatives outlined in this chapter represent a balanced and prudent approach to meeting future needs.
